I am sure most of you are vaguely aware of a once popular TV show called "Survivor," in which people interacted and eventually were forced to vote people out by consensus.
I am suggesting the possibility that if a vast majority of Hatrack citizens want to kick someone off of the forum for simply being onboxious, that they get banned. This would give everyone an incentive to be respectful and not be obnoxious. I won't name any names but there has been and continues to be problems with people technically following all the rules, but instead it is a masquerade allowing them to bother the legitimate people. To be fair this process might need to consist of a way the perpetrator could appeal to KDW, or something.
Obviously I don't expect anything to actually come of this. But I think the idea deserves to be out there.
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
I think I would need to take the idea of "voting people off of the island" to OSC to see whether that is something he would want us to have here.
The thing is, anyone who might be voted off could always try to come back with a different identity and continue to cause problems. I'd much rather have them learn to behave in the first place.
Posted by InarticulateBabbler (Member # 4849) on :
I haven't seen anyone who deserved to be kicked out. If you don't like someone's posts, don't read them. Just look at their Username and skip the post and move on to the next one.
There IS behavior that OSC has emphatically stated that he would not accept on his site. If those rules are violated, you won't have to point it out.
And Kathleen has the authority to eliminate any topics or posts. I, personally, agree with what she said:
quote: I'd much rather have them learn to behave in the first place.
We all should be here for the same reasons.
[This message has been edited by InarticulateBabbler (edited March 11, 2007).]
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
Thank you, InarticulateBabbler.
Posted by Phanto (Member # 1619) on :
I think this is a bad idea. I like the work our moderating team is doing, and if you dislike someone, feel free to ignore them.
Posted by InarticulateBabbler (Member # 4849) on :
Thank you, Kathleen. You're a good and unobtrusive mediator. When you ring in on a topic it is always insightful.
I truly think some Users get insulted too easily. I can understand. It's easy to do. But, most of the posts I've read--even if they are brutal--are honest, and designed to help.
I don't know if it is in this context your suggestion was posted, Zero, but I have to wonder if it's truly a disrespect, or an annoyance.
Posted by Spaceman (Member # 9240) on :
quote:could always try to come back with a different identity and continue to cause problems.
And perhaps a different ISP? Methinks that has happened before and again.
Posted by KayTi (Member # 5137) on :
In my experience in online fora of various types over many many many years, the best defense against obnoxiousness is complete radio silence. Let the moderators do their jobs and edit out inappropriate content, provide the reminders, ban users if violations have occurred, etc.
Otherwise, ignore. Every. Single. Post. Every post that addresses the perpetrators or draws attention to their actions (including, sadly, this one) fuels the fire.
Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :
Hey IB might not have been around back then...
but all I have to say is
"George Wythe."
The prosecution rests.
Posted by RMatthewWare (Member # 4831) on :
Annoying people generally need an audience. Remove the audience and they go away.
As to the voting off the island idea, it's tempting, but there are a few problems. You won't be very happy if you got voted off, and this isn't a democracy.
I think we'll all be okay as long as SHE WHO MUST BE OBEYED is here.
Matt
Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :
Well, let me remind you all of my disclaimer, I don't expect this to be taken seriously, that aside, and since we are taking it seriously, I would be willing to risk being voted off for the benefit of voting people off. Let me explain.
The cost to me is "risk of being voted off," and the benefit is "ability to vote people off," and a further benefit is "people here have less incentive to sabotage the forum or be obnoxious, or rathe,r they have more incentive not to."
Because human behavior is highly rational and is a construct of social norms, I can safely assume that there will be less obnoxiousness, because people respond to incentives, and that I can minimize the risk of being booted off. I know I can minimize the risk (to be approaching 0) because people aren't booted off arbitraily. I can identify behaviors that endanger me to being booted off, to behaviors that don't, I will then modify my behavior to only be "safe behaviors," and tehrefore the benefits greatly outweigh the costs. So, think rationally, I am strongly in favor of the initiative, as would be anyone who doesn't value highly their individual freedom to "be obnoxious." While retaining the security of being a citizen of this board. It is reasonable to assume that anyone who values their individual freedom that highly, (more highly than the freedom to have a board with no obnoxious behavior) would only do so if they themselves had interest in being obnoxious.
Based on the above valid construct, people who are able to think objectively would be in favor of such action unless they wanted to be obnoxious themselves.
Posted by RMatthewWare (Member # 4831) on :
Nah, if people came here to be deliberately disruptive, they would skirt the edge of the rules, hoping that you would go over the edge in response, thus getting you in trouble.
I don't really see any problems here currently. I like KayTi's idea. If you don't like someone, ignore them.
Now, get off this forum and write something!
Matt
Posted by kings_falcon (Member # 3261) on :
Zero while we've had some interesting people like those dedicated to George Wythe or those who thought calling someone a "bigot" was funny, Kathleen does a great job closing threads and addressing the problem when it becomes on.
Also, use discretion if someone is becoming a nut, just stop posting to those threads.
Posted by tnwilz (Member # 4080) on :
Wait… What if people just want to vote me off because I'm a threat... cos I'm just so darn talented (entire tongue in cheek now.) Will we have little writing challenges so I can get immunity? Is there an immunity Idol hidden somewhere in the forums. (Starting to sweat.) Does anyone want to form an alliance. I wont lie to you… ever. And I’ll never vote for you ok… I swear on the life of my mother (s neighbors dog.) So who’s in with me… we need a secret forum where we can talk about the others… I’ll just wait here then for those who want to be in my alliance… Well, not MY alliance, I just want to be in it, I’m not a leader or nothing (leaders always get voted off)… oh crap… its so quiet.
Posted by Pyre Dynasty (Member # 1947) on :
Personally I think we already have that system in place, if we don't like someone they tend not to like it here anymore and wash out. (That or attack like the guy who loved Mr. Jefferson.)
Posted by Rommel Fenrir Wolf II (Member # 4199) on :
I never liked that survivor show Survivor. It was to fake for me. If you want Omega and I to go we will. We would not give a rats behind. Especially since I am going to Afghanistan and I do not know when I will be able to log in to any of my accounts. And if I ever get some time to it will be late and I will most likely be sleeping. Rommel Fenrir Wolf II
Posted by OMAGAOFTHEALPHA (Member # 5163) on :
The Survivor TV show is riged. when I applied they would not let me bring my .45 Colt. I was like WHAT NO SIDE ARM? HOW AM I GOING TO LIVE WITH OUT ONE? as for what Rommel said it is completly fine with me as i have already said before. OMAGAOFTHEALPHA
[This message has been edited by OMAGAOFTHEALPHA (edited March 12, 2007).]
Posted by Rommel Fenrir Wolf II (Member # 4199) on :
.45 Colt on a Family Show? You idiot I don’t blame them, I don’t trust you with a gun after you shot your arm. Rommel Fenrir Wolf II
[This message has been edited by Rommel Fenrir Wolf II (edited March 12, 2007).]
Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :
A vote would be fine if this were a democracy. I see it more akin to being invited into someone's home---be polite, follow their rules, and, if necessary, don't overstay your welcome.
Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :
Oh, yeah...On "Survivor" the TV show...I've always thought the concept was such that they couldn't make it interesting without some kind of rigging...leading me to the conclusion that they are rigging things.
Also...those guys aren't in any danger. They're being followed around by a TV crew who'd be held responsible if they did nothing but film somebody while they died or seriously injured themselves.
Posted by Zero (Member # 3619) on :
::sigh::.... no, I'm not asking anybody to leave.
I was just presenting a facetious idea that I thought was clever.
Posted by OMAGAOFTHEALPHA (Member # 5163) on :
Hay I did not mean to shoot myself it just happened, and do you reamber hew I fixed the problom? OMAGAOFTHEALPHA
Posted by Rommel Fenrir Wolf II (Member # 4199) on :
Yea with a K-BAR after you woke up. Rommel Fenrir Wolf II
Posted by hoptoad (Member # 2145) on :
i would have been kicked off a half dozen times already
Posted by RMatthewWare (Member # 4831) on :
Writing, writing, writing. We must get back to writing!
Matt
Posted by Pyre Dynasty (Member # 1947) on :
Or at the very least, writing about writing.
Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :
Come to think of it, where is our Survivor?
Posted by OMAGAOFTHEALPHA (Member # 5163) on :
Will I be able to have my .45 Colt? I never leave home with out it. I feel naked without it. Like water with no container to hold it. I will only bring one 10round mag and only standard .45ACP ammo. OMAGAOFTHEALPHA
Posted by OMAGAOFTHEALPHA (Member # 5163) on :
PS: Were is it going to be held so I know how to refresh my survival skills.
Posted by Rommel Fenrir Wolf II (Member # 4199) on :
Fool it is on-line. Not at an actual location. Rommel Fenrir Wolf II
Posted by franc li (Member # 3850) on :
I'm not sure what happened to Survivor. The people I know who also know him say he's groovy.
Did anyone used to see those "No shoes, no shirt, no service" signs and wonder what would happen if you showed up in only shoes and a shirt? I guess that's why that one restaurant had the "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason." It was a bit off-putting, to a degree that could only be overcome by the olfactory promises of the breakfast buffet.
Posted by Rommel Fenrir Wolf II (Member # 4199) on :
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA……HAHAHAHAHA.. Cough.. hack up a lung … HAHAHAHA.. I have to try that just for the he!! Of it before I ship out. God that will be one story the MP’s will tell for years, completely sober PFC walks into restaurant wearing only shoes and a shirt. And that will be one to talk about in country for a while. Rommel Fenrir Wolf II
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
Rommel Fenrir Wolf II and OMAGAOFTHEALPHA, you have offered to leave.
You don't seem to be all that interested in writing or discussing writing, so this is probably not the best forum for you. We wish you well, especially in Afghanistan.
Posted by Rommel Fenrir Wolf II (Member # 4199) on :
Thank you for your for your luck. It is just me who is leaving. Omega is just living his life in FLA doing what I told him to do.
UNTIL WE SHALL MEET AGAIN HATRACKERS. MAY THE GOD OF WRITING BE WITH YOU. ROMMEL FENRIR WOLF II